Talk:Bed
ležko from ležat, not lužat It will be clear Moraczewski 05:57, February 8, 2010 (UTC) ---- But, almost all of the Slavic language words of that type are "lužko" Your using "ležko" because the verb "to lie down" is "ležat" is very schematic, Andrej!! And contrary to all of your arguments to me against schematicism. For that reason alone, it should be "lužko" --Steevenusx 09:25, February 8, 2010 (UTC) First, it is not schematic. Ukrainian лiжко is etymologically equivalent to lezxko. This word follows normal model of Slavic word formation. However, in some languages vowel shift has occured, long proto-slavic o became u (this thing also happened to words like kon, stol and some others). And I can not say that I'm against schematism. Schematism is welcomed unless it makes the language less understandable - said Hellerick. And Jan said that Slovianski also allow schematically created words. The only difference is that this schematism is based on natural word formation rules of Slavic languages apart from Slovio Germanic-Esperanto-like creatures. Moraczewski 12:36, February 8, 2010 (UTC) Well, and I say it comes from položit/položenije (Ukrainian: по'лож'ення) so it should be o and not e! ^^ :P --Poloniak 15:22, February 8, 2010 (UTC) ---- LUŽKO vs. LOŽKO vs. LEŽKO I have changed it to "ložko" because using an "e" looks totally out of place (especially for a Polish speaker); even though the vowel today is pronounced as an "u" sound. Thus, with an "o" at least it looks normal. --Steevenusx 15:59, February 8, 2010 (UTC) lozxka ''means "spoon" in Russian. ''lezxat/lozxit is the above-mentioned vowel shift that occurs in may be all Slavic languages Even Polish has leżeć w łóżku Moraczewski 16:25, February 8, 2010 (UTC) True. But it is still łóżku and not łeżku. Now, as far as lozxka '''meaning "spoon"'' in Russian, this would again give good reason to use "lużko"'', since that is the actual "sound" that is heard (except in Ukrainian). And, yes, I know that ''schematically it would make sense to base this on the word "to recline"/"to lie down," but for a word that is so familiar to Poles, Czechs and Slovaks alike (Slovak does have the word "lôžko" where the letter "ô" is also pronounced in IPA as "u̯o" - again the "u" sound and not the "e" sound). So, I have again changed the word back to its original form of "lužko" We can have "ležko" '''as Level 3, perhaps? Poloniak - what do you think about '"lužko"'?' Steevenusx 17:01, February 8, 2010 (UTC) I think we don't need a third option. With lužko and postel (even is ''pościel ''in Polish means bed linen or ''bed sheets) we have understandable words for all Slavs. Andrej? --Poloniak 18:24, February 8, 2010 (UTC) East and South Slavs will likely have problems with understanding lužko, because they dont know the root "luž" (even I would have problem if I meet this word in a sentence. Having little self-education in Slavic comparative linguistics, I would understand Czech lůžko, though, because ů is clear and u is not). So it would be not a good choice. From the other side, root "lež" is known to probably all Slavic languages, so hardly West Slavs will have problems with understanding it - though this word may sound a bit strange (from Russian point of view it looks a bit strange also). Moraczewski 20:10, February 8, 2010 (UTC) Andrej wrote: "East and South Slavs will likely have problems with understanding lužko, because they dont know the root "luž" (even I would have problem if I meet this word in a sentence." Steeven writes: Of course, there will be issues for many words among the different Slavic speakers - such as "ibo" versus "jer" for "because". That is why we have a dictionary. Steevenusx 20:15, February 8, 2010 (UTC) Also it should be noted that lužko for me causes more associations with лужок (gen. лужка, inst. лужком) (little meadow; луг ''- meadow) Moraczewski 20:16, February 8, 2010 (UTC) And another example why we need to have Statements. Here no one of us can take the ultimate decision because even the most "obvious" criteria of understandability seem not to work ... ( Moraczewski 20:17, February 8, 2010 (UTC) So let me make the propose to use the Belorussian word with an E? Ležak! Even if it's a different meaning in Polish language... --Poloniak 21:36, February 8, 2010 (UTC) May be ''ležanka? ležak ''is used in Russian in a bit different manner, but still it is clear enough. But what it means in Polish? will it not be a problem? Moraczewski 05:55, February 9, 2010 (UTC) Those are leżaki. Ležanka looks like a diminutive form from something... hmm... What about asking other people which don't know ložko/lužko?? No (hobby)linguists, I wonder if they will understand any word. I will ask some, when I know more I will tell it here. --Poloniak 00:56, February 10, 2010 (UTC) '''ANDREJ' - you are an engineer. And my experience with engineers is that they want everything in the world classified into nice little category boxes, so that everything is''' "perfect"' and' "orderly". That is admirable; but it is not real life. If you do not like "lužko,"' then use' "postel".' Otherwise, if there is a word you do know know, or are uncertain about, look it up in the dictionary. Or, when the translation engine becomes available, dump the paragraph into the translation engine and it will tell you what it means! Prostuo! Steevenusx 06:25, February 10, 2010 (UTC) Linguists, who are not engineers at all, also love to put everything in order. No. There is another thing. For example, why can't we choose the word "dumat" for "to think"? Right, because it's Russian only. So we already have one principle: not to include one-language-only words unless they are understandable for everybody. Why can't we add all the variants: "veter", "viitr", "vietar", "viatr", "vijetar".... Right, because we selected the easiest solution - "e" instead of "ie", "ia", "ije", "ii" and it's another principle. But I don't see any logic adding "luzxko" or "lozxko" when we can add more understandable word. So, the understandability is not the main principle? We don't care about it? That's not good when everyone has his own words to suggest and no one listens to comments, and the simpliest solution to add all 6-7-50 possible synonyms will lead nowhere. Once I go to the article "therefore" and see there 5 or 6 different words - which of them to chooose?? Which of them will be understood? Or maybe typical users will have to look everything in dictionary? P.S. I don't believe in translation programs. I've tried Google Translate, PROMT and other availiable on the net, they are horrible. Any schoolboy can do better translation. I am familiar with programming myself, so I can tell you what is possible and what is not. Language is the language spoken by human being. Machine is not able to learn it unless it learns whole history of mankind (read Stanislav Lem's "The Cyberiad"). Any natural language has inconsistencies and irregularities. The only language that is theoretically availiable for artifical intellect is LOGLAN. But that's another story. Moraczewski 08:30, February 10, 2010 (UTC) '''ANDREJ:' "GIGO" ''- "Garbage In, Garbage Out" - this is, at least, an English computer expression, meaning: a computer program is only as good as what it is given. If given incomplete or bad code (garbage), the program will not work well. Even so, I agree with you that a translation engine will never be able to be perfect, because it cannot capture the subtle nuances of human communication - which are akin to human emotions. Nonetheless, for purposes of basic communication or as a "preliminary base," they are excellent. And for '''INTERSLAVIC '- the initial translation program is being written for "Srednij Medžuslovianski" - with its simple two-form declension system. Steevenusx 17:03, February 10, 2010 (UTC) I used Google to translate some texts related to technics - and the result was worse than I ever could imagine... By the way returning to the subject - it is not very good when we have to search each word in the dictionary if we want to write. Words must be most common and most understandable - then they will remember easy. Moraczewski 19:59, February 10, 2010 (UTC) ANDREJ: ' You wrote: "it is not very good when we have to search each word in the dictionary if we want to write"'' It is inevitable that you will have to search for some words in the dictionary. For "BED" you may use ''"postel"' - but a Pole may not understand this word, depending upon whether they are familiar with other Slavic languages. '''Postel '''was not a part of my Polish vocabulary when I was growing up. I know it only because of Russian. Everyone at some time will need to consult the dictionary. Steevenusx 23:33, February 10, 2010 (UTC)